Then pre-create a thread pool that is deep enough that you won't have
to make any new threads while you are looping ...
-jason
On May 11, 2006, at 12:30 PM, Maarten de Vries wrote:
I already thought of that, but if the method needs to run more than
once at
the same time, you need to create a new subclassed thread every
time you
want to run the method. The reason why I don't want to wait for the
method
to finish is because I need to run the method a lot of times in a
loop which
can't take longer than one tick. If you make a new thread every
time it
takes longer than one tick.
Thanks,
Maarten
On 11/05/06, Norman Palardy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On May 11, 2006, at 11:00 AM, Maarten de Vries wrote:
> Hi,
>
> How can I call a method (a sub) without waiting for it to finish?
> Or is this
> not possible?
You put the method you want to call in a thread and run that
asynchronously
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>
Search the archives of this list here:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>
Search the archives of this list here:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>
Search the archives of this list here:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>
